Case 2410353/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Rial v Derek Miller (trading as The Picture House) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2410353/2022
- Decision date
- 15 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Rial
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Rial brought two claims against Derek Miller, trading as The Picture House. The tribunal, sitting at Manchester by CVP before Judge Cowx sitting alone, dismissed the claimant’s arrears of pay claim, finding it was not well founded.
The tribunal upheld the claimant’s wrongful dismissal claim. It described that claim as breach of contract arising from the respondent terminating the contract for services without notice. On that basis, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £570.
The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal’s usual procedure. The judgment contains no separate findings on interest or any other heads of remedy beyond the £570 award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to this as a claim for arrears of pay and dismisses it as not well founded; no further legal label is given in the text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as wrongful dismissal, namely breach of contract by terminating the contract for services without notice. | Upheld | — | £570 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £570
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.